Louis Xiv&gildingthesis 170598

************ AN INVESTIGATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF GILDING WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOUIS XIV STYLE ON THE ART OF GILDING IN THE REMAINDER OF EUROPE; AND DEBATE ON WHETHER ITS EFFECT WAS TO STIFLE OR STIMULATE INDIGENOUS ARTISTIC DEVELOPMENTS IN THOSE COUNTRIES

************ JUANA CATALAN MANCAT COLLEGE OF ART & TECHNOLOGY 3 COURSE RESTORATION & CONSERVATION SPRING/SUMMER 1998 TUTOR: YVONNE ROBINSON RD

************ Number of Words 10,058 ************ A dissertation in part fulfilment of the requirements for the B.A.(Hons) in Furniture Restoration/Conservation at the School of Furniture, Manchester College of Arts and Technology. No part of the work in this dissertation has been submitted in support of an application for another degree in this college or any other institution of learning.

************

1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Elizabeth Conran O.B.E., M.A., F.M.A. (Curator of the Bowes Museum, Barnard Castle, County Durham DL12 8NP) For information on the console tables discussed in chapter 4, and permission to take photographs and gain special access.

Pamela Everitt, Yvonne Robinson and Hugh Cowan (Mancat College of Art and Technology) For the loan of books and for general guidance.

2

CONTENTS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

INTRODUCTION

000000001.

4

5

THE ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF GILDING AND ITS

8 IMPORTANCE IN EUROPEAN ART.

2. AN EXAMINATION OF THE BAROQUE IN FRANCE AND THE

19

EVOLUTION OF THE LOUIS XIV STYLE.

3. A STUDY OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOUIS XIV STYLE

26

IN THE EVOLUTION OF EUROPEAN GILDING.

4. THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF GILDING IN EUROPE

34

THROUGH ROCOCO AND NEO-CLASSICISM.

CONCLUSION

49

BIBLIOGRAPHY

54

3

ILLUSTRATIONS

The following illustrations are all courtesy of the Bowes Museum, County Durham. With the exception of Fig. 4, they refer to the console tables described in detail in the main text.

The tables are catalogued as item FW 40 in Room 27 of the museum. They were purchased in 1965 with the help of the Victoria and Albert Museum Purchase Grant Fund, the National Art Collections Fund and the Friends of the Bowes Museum. The RH table (as viewed in Fig. 1) was used for the detail shots. FIG

PAGE No.

DESCRIPTION

1

39

Location as presented in the museum

2

39

General view

3

40

Front view from standing height

4

40

One of a pair of French pier tables, dated about 1750 item FW 357/378, Room 12

5

41

Close-up of shell motif on base

6

41

Detail of base of leg immediately to R of shell

7

42

Detail of floral motif under RH front edge of table top

8

42

Detail of floral motif under RH side edge of table top

9

43

Close-up of crest in upper front centre of table

10

44

Detail of top of leg at front RH corner

4

INTRODUCTION

Gilding is not art. It is a technique which allows the artist to express himself in the purest of forms. The worker in gilt is rarely a slave to the grain or dimensions of a natural material or to the uncertainty of dyes and finishes. The ravages of time will have relatively little effect on his masterpiece - physical evidence of our obsession with gilding dates back to the ancient Egyptians.1

There is no question of the attractiveness of this particular medium to the artist or craftsman seeking recognition and some possibility of immortality.

This dissertation investigates how the special characteristics of gilding lent themselves to the styles of the period and encouraged the artists and craftsmen of the day to flaunt their creations shamelessly.

An examination will be made based on available historical evidence to demonstrate whether the Louis XIV era indeed represented gilding at its height or whether it was something of a renaissance, or even a relatively poor reflection of the splendours of some bygone age. Or whether the craft of gilding subsequently went on to reach greater heights, inspired by or regardless of the Louis XIV influence.

We shall see that movement of styles, artistic forms and indeed the craftsmen and artists themselves between countries was at times very swift even without the power of today’s media and transportation. Nevertheless, the adoption of specific styles was often restricted or suppressed for financial, political or traditional reasons so that sometimes a movement could be 1

Whiley, G.

Goldbeating 5000 years of craftsmanship - Frontispiece

5

rejected altogether, delayed or only adopted in part. For this reason it is necessary to include a discussion of styles subsequent to that of the main period in question for some considerable time afterwards in order to identify continuing trends.

The first chapter will cover the development of gilding techniques and associated practices in parallel with artistic, cultural and political movements throughout history.

It will include a discussion on the perception of gilding in the context of art, particularly with reference to picture framing and will investigate how it is that gilt objects and their producers frequently provide only a supporting role even during this celebration of extreme opulence and ostentation.

The second chapter will be made up of a reasonably detailed description of the Baroque style in France, and some comparisons with its interpretations elsewhere in Europe. This part will look at the roots and influences leading up to the Baroque, and its evolution into the specific style of Louis XIV, immortalised in the Palais de Versailles. This section will contain arguments as to the socio-political reasons which allowed gilding to flourish under Louis XIV.

The third chapter will be an in-depth analysis of the potency of the Louis XIV style relative to other styles of the period and immediately following, in France and elsewhere in Europe. Adaptations of this flamboyant style to often more conservative tastes and differing circumstances particularly in Northern Europe will be identified.

The chapter will include arguments as to whether the Palais de Versailles and the blossoming of Baroque into Louis XIV style could have taken place elsewhere given similar circumstances and priorities, and if so, would some other school have taken precedence. Would gilding then have 6

had a less important role?

The fourth chapter looks at the further development of European styles, with particular reference to gilding, and investigates to what extent they were still influenced directly or indirectly by the Louis XIV style.

My intention at this point is to chose an appropriate item and undertake a detailed description and analysis of the features which identify its particular style and the extent to which it may or may not reveal characteristics peculiar to those developed under Louis XIV.

The conclusion will summarise the main points and will explore the question as to whether the Louis XIV period indeed represented a high point, or possibly the high point in European gilding. Finally the presence of original Louis XIV influence in the modern world will be sought, not just in reproductions but in original art.

1 THE ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF GILDING AND ITS IMPORTANCE IN EUROPEAN ART.

Much has been written about the practice and techniques of gilding, which dates back to about 3000 BC. Our interest in particular is not in the techniques themselves but in any external influences which affected the choice of method and shaped the finished article. This includes the choice of style for purely aesthetic and cultural reasons, the ability or experience of the workers of the time or in a given place, availability of materials and appropriateness for the task in question. Of course a further consideration is that not all work was undertaken with the same apparently unlimited budget available to Louis XIV. 7

That said, the impressive finish provided by gold leaf belies its actual cost. Gold is indeed an extraordinary substance. It can easily be beaten or hammered to a thickness of 0.000013 cm. Yet its remarkable resistance to corrosion means that even at that thickness (provided its purity has not been significantly compromised by the addition of base metals) a gilt object will retain its impression of being of solid gold for time immemorial, unless it suffers actual physical abuse.

An interesting observation is that, historically rather than technically speaking, gilt objects have more chance of long-term survival than solid objects. In times of hardship precious metal objects have often been the first casualty throughout history in order to achieve a quick injection of funds. They could also be sacrificed and reproduced in a different style to comply with the current fashion. Much of the treasure of Versailles was lost in this way:

“Five years before the death of Louis XIV (1715) another great melt was ordered…”2

Gilded objects on the other hand are not ‘recyclable’. We need to bear this in mind when considering periods or styles which appear to be dominated by gilt objects - other objects which may have played an equally important role are more likely to have been lost through fragility, woodworm, changes in taste or the pressures of economics.

There is an inevitable yet complicated correlation between the technicians in gold leaf and the artists and their patrons who worked with it or commissioned it. From a strictly financial point of view it seems obvious that the thinner an ingot of gold can be beaten the further it will go. But the application of thin gold leaf requires experience and artistry which in itself carries a cost.

2

Taylor, G.

Continental Gold & Silver

8

Furthermore, gilding emphasises the qualities of a piece of art. If it is a poor subject no amount of gilding will compensate for its inherent deficiencies. On the contrary, the gilding will simply encourage the eye to delay its gaze on what is quickly revealed to be an inferior product. Even today it is impossible to mass-produce moulded designs which merit the privilege of this treatment with the result that shiny metallic finishes are so often regarded as brash and distasteful. There are no short-cuts to a gilded masterpiece.

9

Wealth and opulence are therefore pre-requisites for an age in which gilding thrives. It also requires an interest in the arts and perhaps much more importantly a desire to demonstrate a position of superiority. It seems to say ‘I am in a position to surround myself with these beautiful and costly objects and will do so since nobody can stop me’. Gilding flourishes in absolutist regimes typified by Ancient Egyptian civilisations and Far Eastern Dynasties.

This gives us a picture of the sort of atmosphere in which gilding comes to the fore. We shall see in the next chapter the reasons why gilding was so much in keeping with the political climate of the Louis XIV era. Let us now look at the artistic rather than socio-economic canvas on which the style evolved.

Renaissance styles had arrived in France from Italy with Italian artists working at the courts of Francis I and Henry II from 1515. At the end of the 16th Century the Renaissance influence decreased and it fell to Henry IV to revive the furniture industry. This he achieved by setting up workshops in Paris and importing foreign craftsmen.

The Louis XIII style was generally regarded as an adaptation of French Renaissance and dominated the early 1600's. Angular Gothic features were still present in furniture of the era though newer trends were adopted more quickly in other works. This is a good example of the problem of defining certain styles by date since they are often adopted or retained over different periods in different media. We will see more of this later.

Louis XIII also retained, or recovered, Italian influence thanks to Mme de Medici who brought Italian styles as well as an interest in Flemish art to his court. This Italian flamboyance continued through the Régence period (1643-61) during Louis XIV's early youth when France was effectively ruled by an Italian, Cardinal Mazarin. His influence should not be underestimated he gave his name to a particular style of 8-legged bureau, the 'Bureau Mazarin'. 10

This then is the background to the period and an appropriate point to study the importance attributed to gilding as an art medium. This discussion will lead us on to an investigation of the development of gilding and styles in general throughout Europe.

As indicated in the introduction gilt areas and pieces, perhaps surprisingly in view of their obvious intrinsic beauty, often take a secondary role - as a support for a table-top for instance or in the form of a candelabra. Nowhere is this more evident than in the production of picture frames. Not only does the gold leaf need to be laid on an already styled base but furthermore, the main function of the frame itself is to show off its contents to the best advantage.

The level of priority attached to the production of picture frames in general is worthy of particularly detailed study since the framemaker’s art is inextricably entwined with the art of gilding. Apart from the fact that the use of gilding is widespread and trends can be traced with relative ease, it is appropriate in the context of gilding within art because a picture is specifically designed to be contemplated whereas a building or a piece of furniture will normally also have a practical role.

Unfortunately, it is not the case that because of the intrinsic value of the work of art which it encloses there may be more chance that the gilded surround is preserved. Old frames were frequently abandoned to be replaced by others either for convenience or to suit the style of the day regardless of the fact that they may have been completely incompatible with the paintings therein. Even the British Museum is guilty of this. Timothy Clifford in the foreword to Frameworks by Paul Mitchell and Lynn Roberts recounts:

“When I was in the British Museum Print Room less than twenty years ago,

11

watercolours and drawings were often acquired with their original frames but for convenience of storage the frames were all disposed of and the works remounted to standard sizes, with no photograph or account having been taken of the original frames, which sometimes may even have retained the framemaker’s label”3.

Nevertheless, a study of frames and writings about them generally gives us a good indication of the progress of the gilder’s art throughout the period we are studying. It is important though not to make the obvious assumption that the frame bears any historical or stylistic connection with its contents.

If gilding is the grandfather of artistic techniques, picture framing is a relative infant, its first use in Europe being around the 12th century in Italy as a fixed carved border which subsequently developed into the more recognisable movable frame some 200 years later. The relationship between gilding and framing was, however, a match made almost literally in heaven. Inevitably dominated by religious influence around that time and for many centuries later, works of art immediately cried out for ‘celestial’ surroundings - the obvious choice being the glory of gold. Later, the same glorification with or without the religious connotations would be used to represent the position of a portrait’s subject in society.

So, where did gilding fit in to the production of works of art? In the case of picture frames did the artist specify the detail of the gilt finish? Did he indeed specify a gilt frame at all? Or was it left to the joiner or carver to frame the picture as he saw fit? Or perhaps the choice was left to the patron who commissioned the work or to the subject of the portrait? Sometimes the position of the picture if it was designed for a specific site could indicate that the decision be left to the architect or interior designer. A further possibility is that a frame could be produced without any 3

Clifford, T.

Extract from his foreword to Frameworks by Paul Mitchell and Lynn Roberts P. 8

12

concept of its final destination. In reality any of these are possible options and in most cases of course the ‘subsidiary’ nature of the gilded work would mean that its origins went undocumented.

All this makes it difficult to pinpoint the style of a gilded piece since an obviously Baroque painting may not necessarily be enclosed in a classic Baroque frame - even if they were produced at the same time. To put this a little more clearly, even if a painting is known to be in its original frame, not all art forms develop at the same rate so a frame could be produced by a cabinet-maker still embroiled in the height of Baroque style whilst the painter had moved on to Rococo. Throughout history though at least some artists and patrons have recognised the importance of the surrounding of their works of art and have been careful to specify their requirements. Sadly this attention to detail has often been lost as they passed through the hands of dealers and curators.

An example of an artist specifying (albeit tentatively) his recommendations for the style of the frame is quoted in The Art of the Picture Frame. Nicolas Poussin wrote in a letter to his patron Cantelou in 1639:

“it would be very fitting if the said frame be gilded quite sweetly with mat gold, for it unites very sweetly with the colours without clashing with them”4

Although their importance may have been recognised at the time however, more often than not details of frames would have been discussed more informally than the content itself with the result that information on these finer points went undocumented.

Simon, J.

4

The Art of the Picture Frame P.17

13

In the interests of complete harmony, surroundings also influenced the style of frames - or if the frames were considered to be of sufficient merit they could themselves influence the surrounding decor. This is discussed in some depth in Jacob Simon's work on The Art of the Picture Frame. The properties of the colour of gold have benefits but also present problems:

"Every other material offers a colour, but gold is neutral"5.

This makes it an excellent choice to enhance a painting since it does not conflict with the colours of the painting.

It is odd to think of a finish so luxurious as gold in this way. Neutral normally implies staid and bland, but in the case of gold it is versatility at its best. Possibly the only conflicting colour is yellow, viz. Mrs Arbuthnot's comments at the Duke of Wellington's proposals for the Waterloo Chamber at Aspley House:

“He is going to hang it with yellow damask, which is just the very worst colour for pictures and will kill the effect of the gilding.”6

Deep reds and blues seem to be the most popular, and the fact that these preferences are documented on occasions is a refreshing demonstration that the necessity of showing off the gilt finish to best effect was valued.

Durability influenced the development of gilding. Oil gilding was more appropriate to wetter climates, and to exterior surfaces due to its intrinsic water-resistant qualities. 5I 6

Ibid. Ibid.

P.17 - quoting Percy Fitzgerald in the Art Journal of 1886 P.18

14

“The grounds of ancient gildings were of two kinds; one of which was for miniatures and places not exposed to damp; the other consisted of an oil mordant, which was employed on walls and places exposed to humidity”.7

This practical explanation for the predominance of oil gilding in the Northern European countries coincided with an artistic one - namely that the duller finish of oil gilding was more in keeping with the stoic Protestant culture compared to the more flamboyant burnished watergilded finish of the drier Catholic south. Oil gilding was also cheaper and simpler to produce and would not in any case be acceptable in principle to the ‘no expense spared’ culture of the court of Louis XIV and similar regimes.

Claus Grimm describes some of the various influences to the final appearance of the picture frame.

“The migratory character of the artisan class, without respect to international borders, tended to blur the distinctions among national styles”8.

Furthermore he states that:

“…artisans from every land were at work……the division of labor in the production process brought with it a mixture of influences.9

Merrifield Grimm, C. 9 Ibid. 7 8

Original Treatises on Gilding and Other Arts (1804) P. .xcv The Book of Picture Frames P. 46 P. 46

15

Basically, the process of frame-making was a multi-skilled process and if a country had a particular influx of, say, foreign carvers, their influence would be seen in the production of frames. Grimm states that in the cabinet-making workshops of the Bavarian court, expanded on a regular basis from 1715:

“ultimately some 90 craftsmen were at work, among them many Italians”.10

Clearly, international influences other than those directly attributable to the court of Louis XIV were already at work throughout Europe.

Let us look in more detail at the importance attributed to the craft of gilding. This discussion leads us to an analysis of the relationship between art and craft and their relative values. Relatively recent examples of our general lack of appreciation of the value of the frame as part of a work of art have already been documented here.

But the concept of art in the 18th century was different to that of today. Gilding and framing were perhaps more properly appreciated in the whole perspective and what we consider to be ‘art’ today was seen in a more commercial and practical light. Patrons would commission a work, particularly portraits, to perform a function and the frame would form part of that requirement. The painter was sometimes little more than a member of a team employed to create an environment of overall beauty or to reproduce something which would otherwise be lost. The other members of the team - carvers, gilders and so on would likely enjoy similar status at least until the painter acquired some degree of notoriety for his individual artistry.

This correlation between the importance of the frame and of its contents was demonstrated by the relative cost of the frame. In Frameworks it is stated that: 10

Ibid.

P. 46

16

“generally frames cost between fifteen and eighty per cent of the picture, and frequently over half”.11

Shrewd dealers can still make killings today on the purchase of elaborate baroque gilt frames simply because the paintings contained therein, which are usually the sole object of the modern buyer’s attention, are regarded as virtually worthless.

So, framing has enjoyed varying degrees of appreciation over the years - sometimes even taking precedence. In the late 18th century for instance the fashion for gilt frames in England led to many previously plain-framed works, regardless of their content, to be re-framed in gilt to show them off to best effect.

11

Mitchell, P. and Roberts, L.

17

Frameworks P.23

2 AN EXAMINATION OF THE BAROQUE IN FRANCE AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE LOUIS XIV STYLE.

In order to identify the specific characteristics of Louis XIV style, which is generally considered to relate to a period concurrent with his reign between 1643 and 1715, we first need to be able to recognize the original Baroque style from which it developed.

Influences leading to the French Baroque style and its subsequent refinement or adaptation to the specific style of Louis XIV were many and varied. Although the Italian roots are of paramount importance, inspiration and technique from this source had already become established during the Renaissance so it is difficult to define whether French baroque style was an adaptation of the original Italian-influenced French Renaissance style or took a more direct route from Italian Baroque. Perhaps a combination of the two is likely. Other European influences and adaptations also played a part. The origins of the Baroque style are indeed so complicated that some observers regarded it as a completely independent entity, neither a rise nor a decline from classic, but a totally different art.

Baroque is a very wide term, covering a long period of time from most of the 17th century to the early 18th century, and encompassing art, literature, sculpture, architecture and furniture in Europe and beyond. Clearly, it would not be appropriate for this dissertation to undertake a thorough description of all the nuances, but there are certain important characteristics which dominate throughout.

“Baroque forms were designed to dazzle and overwhelm. Sculpture, architecture and painting were fused to create buildings, rooms, paintings and furniture which were sometimes almost dizzying in their magnificence. Chairs became thrones, 18

cabinets were miniature palaces”12

Baroque style is at its best displayed in its totality - that is to say within a uniformity including the architectural style of the room and surrounding furnishings, the building itself and preferably even the design of the gardens, as is the case in the Palais de Versailles. The same words appear in many descriptions of the style, the overwhelming impression being that of grandeur.

Since furniture is our main sphere of interest we will concentrate on that particular genre. Baroque furniture is invariably solid in appearance and shows no sign of the apparent frailty and delicateness of the subsequent Rococo. A particularly prevalent characteristic is that of columnar legs, often joined near the base by horizontal cross-pieces which gave an additional impression of solidity. The basic structure, though always imposing was usually relatively uncomplicated, the decoration being provided by complex inlays, marquetry, carving and of course gilding.

Other important elements of the Baroque form were:

“…theatricality, the manipulation of light and shade, the use of curving lines, the voluptuous explosion of ornament and the preference for organic rather than geometric motifs.13”

One of the reasons for the impressive and structured development of decorative arts in France was the establishment in 1663 of the Garde meuble de la Couronne in order to provide the French court with furnishings including frames. These workshops produced a continuous and controlled output of high quality art works up to and through the reign of Louis XIV. Although influenced by outside styles where appropriate, a high degree of standardisation along with 12 13

Stone, A Antique Furniture P.’s 28 & 31 Mitchell, P. and Roberts, L. Op. Cit. P.118

19

security and wealth of materials available to the carvers, joiners and gilders led to the development in France of styles which were more specific and readily recognisable than elsewhere in Europe. The styles were also documented in pattern books which were disseminated out from Paris to the provinces.

Gilding had played its part in all these styles but begins to take on an increasingly important role throughout the development of the Baroque period. In conjunction with the artistic origins of this style, politics and religion were fundamental to its development. This relationship reached its climax with the arrival of Louis XIV.

The conflict between the predominance of Catholicism in Southern Europe and of Protestantism in the North was a key factor towards provoking the exuberance of the Baroque style. The Counter Reformation, an anti-Protestant movement in the 16th & 17th centuries, encouraged elaborate and impressive art as a means of glorifying and propagating the faith. Countless gilt frescoes in Catholic places of worship are a testament to this.

In politics, Louis XIV's desire to demonstrate absolute power and control not only at home but throughout Europe would have led him to produce the ultimate in the art of the day whatever it was. His arrival coincided conveniently with the height of the Baroque era with all its dramatic overtones and unbridled ostentation. The Palais de Versailles was the inevitable result. An unrivalled showpiece for the finest of Baroque art, and an impressive platform to which Louis XIV and his designers could add their distinctive touches. The Baroque style could hardly have been more perfect to represent Louis XIV’s intentions. Lavishness and extravagance within a solid framework of power and strength.

So perfect indeed was this style for Louis XIV’s purposes that after researching the opinions of a number of observers a cynical commentator could dismiss the adaptation into Louis XIV style 20

as ‘more of the same’. But we must not degrade the achievements of thousands of craftsmen nor of the monarch himself. This was the height of ‘High Baroque’. It was ‘more’ in every sense. More in sheer quantity of objects produced. More in detail, in decoration, in quality and in perfection. It was, as Louis XIV would have intended, the absolute ‘state of the Art’.

“Richness was piled on richness, and ornamentation reached a point beyond which progress would be impossible”14

Henry Heydenryk,Jr. offers us one view of Louis XIV’s adaptation and enhancement of the Baroque style with regard to picture frames:

“It is not surprising that there is a certain sameness in all Louis XIV frames. They are an elaboration of the frames of the preceding period. Gradually during this long reign the wide, carved outer part of the frame became deeper and more dominant, the floral elements of the decoration became more stylized, and the flow of the carving was punctuated with pronounced corner and center designs, which are a characteristic of the taste of the time”.15

There was no escaping the enormous cost to the French people of financing Louis XIV’s uncompromising self-indulgence. Technicians, craftsmen, artists and designers in

their

thousands were necessary to do justice to the finished product. Yet part of the attraction was undoubtedly the simple demonstration of this power. Louis XIV’s style was certainly not readily transferable to any regime with a strong social conscience or an absence of wealth or artistry, regardless of their preferred tastes.

14 15

Binstead, H.E. Heydenryk, H

Furniture P. 80 Art and History of Frames P. 65

21

France up to that time had certainly been an imitator rather than an innovator. A dramatic statement was required in order to establish Louis XIV's superiority.

The Larousse

Encyclopaedia puts this quite succinctly:

“Louis XIV voulut imposer à l'extérieur la prédominance française”

16

("Louis

XIV wished to impose French predominance abroad").

His strength of character manifested itself in apparently contradictory fields in battle and in art. It seems that those whom he could not defeat by force he intended to defeat through admiration (or possibly jealousy).

He kept his chosen spheres of domination quite separate. And in searching for an example of this we can gain an insight into his appreciation of gilding as a pure art form which does not sit comfortably in the harsh world of aggression and militaristic domination. Gilding dominates the entire interior of the Palais de Versailles but is by no means so prominent in the areas of the palace dedicated to themes of war and politics such as the Drawing Rooms devoted to Peace and War. Here darker bronze finishes are more in evidence. Gilt is regarded as a medium of sweetness and light; for more ethereal, artistic subjects. This trend becomes even more pronounced later when the solid and architectural overtones of Baroque style give way to the lighter and more delicate Rococo.

The Palais de Versailles was the culmination of Baroque style, or, more precisely of High Baroque. In An Encyclopaedia of Tables Simon Yates describes Versailles as:

"The standard for European taste".17 16 17

Librairie Larousse Yates, S.

Petit Larousse 1965 P. 1505 An Encyclopaedia of Tables P.13

22

Although the style was imitated elsewhere in Europe it was bound to be difficult to recreate such extravagance. Even today, the cost and intricacy of the larger scale examples of Louis XIV furniture makes attempts at reproductions impractical. And although craftsmen from Versailles disseminated their art throughout Europe, a combination of local pride, social conscience and relative poverty inevitably dictated that, if the grandeur of Versailles could not be bettered something would have to substitute it.

23

3 A STUDY OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOUIS XIV STYLE IN THE EVOLUTION OF EUROPEAN GILDING.

Henry Heydenryk,Jr. states the importance of French influence at this time in no uncertain terms:

“During the first half of the seventeenth century leadership in the decorative arts passed from Italy to France”18

The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes by Louis XIV in 1685 and events leading up to it may have been the principal reason for the introduction of his styles into the remainder of Europe.

A saga of conflict and uneasy treaties between Protestants and Catholics in France in the 16 th Century had reached a defining stage with the conversion to Catholicism of Henry IV and his issue of the Edict of Nantes in 1598. In an attempt to promote religious harmony and avoid further strife this declaration granted almost complete religious freedom to the Protestants (Huguenots).

The Huguenots again flourished despite further attempts at control during the quest for absolutist government which began under Louis XIII. No doubt provoked by a long and bitter war with Dutch Protestants begun in1672, Louis XIV lost patience with the Protestants in his own country in 1685 and revoked the freedom which had been granted to them by the Edict of Nantes. Somewhere between 200,000 and 1,000,000 French Protestants principally of the influential and artistic middle and upper classes were forced into exile, many to England, Germany, the 18

Heydenryk, H

Op. Cit. P. 62

24

Netherlands and Switzerland. In excess of 30,000 labourers and craftsmen had been working on the Palais de Versailles - many of them would have been caught up in the flight and looking to pursue their craft elsewhere in Europe.

Daniel Marot was one of the French Huguenot architects and designers who found himself in Europe at this time, first in Holland at the court of William of Orange and later at William’s English court following his marriage to Mary Stuart. In Frameworks Marot is named as

“probably the direct channel for English frames in the Louis XIV taste”.19

The style perfected under Louis XIV was so intrinsically beautiful and universally admired that it was impossible to abandon it abruptly and completely. But it would have been reasonable to expect the exiled Protestant craftsmen to be somewhat embittered and receptive to proposals to move away from the flamboyant Catholic orientated Louis XIV style, either to something new or to a return to their religious roots.

Let us look at in more detail at styles and trends in other European countries, during the time of Louis XIV.

In Northern Europe there was a general exchange of creativity between Flemish and Netherlandish - though all with an original Italian Baroque base, and varying degrees of a continuing Mannerist style. French influence was strong though. As Henry Heydenryk,Jr. states:

“Naturally, the Dutch were not insensitive to their powerful neighbor, and Louis

19

Mitchell, P. and Roberts, L.

25

Op. Cit. P. 166

XIII and Louis XIV frames were imitated assiduously”.20

The Thirty Years War (1618-1648) in Germany and the Turkish presence in Austria inhibited the development of the Baroque style in those countries until the 18th century. However, there had been direct contact between Germany and Italy in the exchange of trade and design ideas since the middle ages. It would appear that the influence of Louis XIV here was negligible - by the time the cultural revolution took place the style was more directly Rococo.

In certain art-forms, furniture for instance, Renaissance styles continued to be popular in Northern Europe throughout the Louis XIV period. Development proceeded with Neoclassicism, with some Rococo characteristics - but direct influence from the Louis XIV schools is difficult to identify.

Charles I of England had been directly and indirectly responsible for much of the crossfertilisation of styles in Europe prior to Louis XIV's reign. In this case it was not a movement of artists and craftsmen but of the artefacts themselves. Charles I may have been a poor king, but is widely regarded as: "England's greatest collector"21

His journey to Madrid in 1623 was the likely starting point. Thereafter, he travelled extensively in Europe picking up art treasures as he went.

But, unwittingly, Charles I's collections did not just enrich and influence English heritage. After his demise the treasures of a life's work of collecting were disposed of unceremoniously in the so-called Commonwealth Sale in 1649 which attracted interested parties from all over Europe. 20 21

Heydenryk, H Op. Cit. P. 66 Arnold, B. Art Atlas of Britain & Ireland P. 56

26

Thus a microcosm of European styles was created in Britain and subsequently disseminated throughout the continent. This reinforced the acceptability of art as a medium which knew no boundaries - physical, religious or political - and further prepared Europe for an ongoing exchange of cultural ideas.

Later influences in England included an acceptance of the Louis XIII styles after 1660 as a consequence of the Restoration since Charles II was a first cousin of Louis XIV. Charles II reigned between 1660 and 1685 at the time of the Puritan Protectorate led by Oliver Cromwell which marked a return to much simpler styles.

Thereafter English furniture was marked by a return to decoration. Likewise the accession of William III of the House of Orange in 1689 introduced an emphasis of Dutch influence. A mixture of influences was therefore already present by the time of the arrival of the Louis XIV style, but the level of acceptance of each style varied:

“Within England different regions and different political tendencies produced favored stylistic trends, based upon allegiance to either a royalist taste with French overtones or to a puritan, Dutch style.”22

The progress of English gilding is summarised by Stan Learoyd in his work on English Furniture:

“Gilding was used on English furniture from the middle ages but it was only in the last quarter of the seventeenth century that it became really popular”23

22 23

Grimm, C. Learoyd, S

Op. Cit. P. 45 English Furniture Construction and Decoration P. 46

27

Contemporary with the rise of the Louis XIV style, possibly England's first autonomous style, that of William and Mary was coming into being. Based on French and Italian styles and heavily influenced by Daniel Marot (see above) the style was however adapted considerably to local tastes to sufficient extent to become separately identifiable.

John Pelletier was one of the craftsmen of the time who specialised in carved and gilded furniture. Pelletier came to England from Paris, via Amsterdam, with his sons, Rene and Thomas in the 1680's, refugees from the persecution of the Huguenots. The time they spent in Amsterdam is not well documented. Pelletier may have been there for a year, but Rene up to 10 years before he came to London. Nevertheless, any Dutch influence they may have acquired was not always welcomed - John Pelletier was appreciated for his familiarity with Louis XIV style. Six marble tables on giltwood frames made for Hampton Court Palace between 1699 and 1702 are fine examples of this.

"The furniture which John Pelletier supplied for Hampton Court reflected William III's desire to emulate the furnishings of Louis XIV's palace at Versailles."24

Not all monarchs and leaders of fashion of course shared Louis XIV’s versatility in his ability to be equally at ease on the battlefield or in the designer’s studio. In many cases fashions would represent not so much the preferences of the head of state but rather the tastes of the ladies he wished to impress or put at ease:

“What followed later in the reign [of William III] was more emphasised in style and more gorgeous in colour being prompted by the influence of Louis XIV and 24

Murdoch, T

Jean, Rene & Thomas Pelletier cited in The Burlington Magazine No. 1136, November 1997 P.’s 733-734

28

the Frenchwoman Louise de Keroualle; the latter, while leading the fashion here, combined the offices of mistress to the English king and spy to the French king. The women of the court had the greatest influence on matters relating to furnishings…”25

Similarly, during the development of the subsequent Louis XV, or Rococo, style the monarch’s lack of taste in questions of art was compensated for by the influence of his paramour, Mme Pompadour who from her position of power was able to impose her culture and refinement on a courtesan society which was bewitched by luxury and willing to follow the dominant undercurrent of moral relaxation.

Moving to Southern Europe, The Art of the Edge describes the relative levels of influence of French and Italian picture frames in Europe and in Italy itself as follows:

“Up to the late 17th or early 18th century, the most influential centers of frame making were Italian. In the early part of the 18th century, French frames took the ascendency. Yet in spite of this dominance, the development of the indigenous frame styles in Italy continued”26

Louis XIV (and subsequent French styles) were therefore of great, but not absolute importance in Italy.

In Spain, French influence had previously been noted more by its absence - the Spanish appearing to favour carved wood with a lesser amount of gilding which was often deeper in colour. Distinct and unique characteristics including dramatic colour contrasts and peculiarly 25 26

MacQuoid, P. Brettell, R.R.

A History of English Furniture P.108 The Art of the Edge P’s. 32-33

29

Spanish insets, clasp motifs and refined use of sgraffito etching techniques had already developed prior to this period. Renaissance, Mannerist and Baroque styles had all been modified to the Spanish taste with Flemish, Italian and Dutch influences, mingled with the ever-present Moorish inclination. Gilding in particular in Spain could easily be attributed rather to a long Moorish tradition than to any other more Northern influence.

Italian influence had however been predominant and it was not until the time of Louis XIV that French influence in Spain simultaneously achieved a similar (though not greater) level of importance.

As we have seen, by the time of the height of Louis XIV’s reign and influence, and the completion of the Baroque elements of the Palais de Versailles, Baroque had been accepted to some degree or other and with some adaptations throughout Europe. Our research reveals, however, that at this stage direct influences from France had been quite limited.

We must remember that Louis XIV had plunged most of Europe into war during his reign. It is a tribute to the artistic merit of his creations that any of these countries wished to retain or develop any style which could be associated with him at all.

The next chapter looks at how these complicated and conflicting factors manifested themselves in works created in the years following the reign of Louis XIV; and in the part played by gilding in this progression.

30

4 THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF GILDING IN EUROPE THROUGH ROCOCO AND NEO-CLASSICISM.

Baroque gave way fairly quickly to Rococo, which flourished broadly between 1715 and 1774, and is also known as Louis XV style, although opinions vary on how closely the style was concurrent with his reign. In provincial France, for instance, and in other European countries the popularity of the style endured well beyond his death in 1774.

Since Louis XV was only 5 years old when he succeeded his great-grandfather in 1715 the country was ruled by a regent, Philippe II, Duc d’Orléans, until 1723 during which period the transition from Luis XIV to Rococo took place. (This “Régence” period is not of course to be confused with the English Regency period and style between 1800 and 1830.)

The short period of the French Régence is of interest to us since it shows to what extent Louis XIV styles were retained and adapted in France for the ensuing Rococo which gained acceptance throughout Europe. The uncertainty of the Régence and the ensuing lack of direction and assertion under Louis XV in contrast to the domination and powerful leadership of his predecessor may have been responsible for a concurrent lack of direction in the development of artistic styles. Craftsmen skilled in techniques appropriate to Louis XIV were encouraged to continue in similar vein whilst at the same time a less autocratic approach allowed experimentation with returns to older values and new and imported techniques.

Finally, however, a recognisable Rococo style emerged from the mêlée. The continuing characteristics of Louis XIV visible in Rococo can be seen either as a tribute to the power of the monarch, or as a demonstration of the weakness of his successor. Perhaps the protagonists and

31

innovators who would have been capable of developing more individualistic progressions in France had all been exiled and were enjoying extended success repeating their familiar creations elsewhere in Europe.

Rococo style is on a less monumental scale than that of Louis XIV and is characterised by delicateness, curved lines, exquisite ornamentation, gracefulness and attention to fine detail. One of the most recognisable characteristics is the systematic abandonment of the straight line and a concerted move away from the architectural forms which were prevalent in the Baroque. Considerable Baroque and Louis XIV elements remain, but the differences could perhaps be summarised in today’s terms by reference to enhanced subtlety and tastefulness.

The level of ornamentation, and consequently gilding, was still very high however, and certainly did not mark a return to more austere Classical values which were not revived until the NeoClassical or Louis XVI period of about 1760 to 1789.

The way in which these styles are usually named today gives us an insight into the level of their influence. Louis XIV style is regarded as a French adaptation of Baroque whereas Rococo is synonymous with Louis XV and Neo-Classicism with Louis XVI. The latter two styles are universally recognised throughout Europe and beyond either by the name of the monarch or of the style itself, but Louis XIV style is referred to relatively rarely for works produced outside France.

In gilt picture frames the transition from Louis XIV to Louis XV through the Régence style in France is particularly well marked in the observance of the edges of the frame as strict boundaries. Most Louis III frames had kept their ornamentation strictly within the straight rectangular confines of the border. Moving into the late 17th century the centre-corner carvings of French leaf frames began to move away from the more formal Italian and Spanish 32

interpretation by overlapping the outer edges.

This trend continued through the Régence period by way of an increasing invasion by the organic curves and tendrils of the ornamentation towards the inner edge of the frame and over the outer edges. By the arrival of the full Rococo idiom the sweeping curves and ornate fineries of the gilding had begun to show a marked contempt for the traditional straight confines of the frame and were starting to invade the area generally reserved for the painting itself. Acceptable for mirrors, perhaps, and also for works where the artist had very close control over the production of the frame, this could nevertheless be seen as a sign of a frame exceeding its status and beginning to dominate both its content and its surroundings.

This trend was more marked in furniture where the extent of ornamentation could proceed more openly, but in picture-framing the arrival of the more formal neo-classical frame was welcomed by many observers who felt that there was a danger of the design of frames detracting from the value of the painting itself. The level of ornamentation declined steadily until the end of the first half of the 19th century by which time the picture frame had been reduced to what R.R. Brettell describes as: “a fairly plain, functional object”.27

Brettell’s book, The Art of the Edge, (op. cit.) brackets together French and Italian influence in the development of Renaissance, Baroque and Rococo frames in Germany, Austria, and the Low Countries. Many Dutch and South German frames created for upper-middle class interiors, however, did not follow these styles at all but were instead of more traditional black moulding in keeping with their more austere surroundings. Here again, Louis XIV gilt styles did not gain universal acceptance. It is also interesting to note that in these countries there were variants according to class whereas in France art was far less restricted by class boundaries: Brettell, R.R.

Op. Cit. P.42

27

33

“Artistic forms, so much is clear to be seen, always had, in France, a quite different status and acceptance than in Germany, Holland or Italy, where despite all the stimuli provided by the leading art houses, middle class, ecclesiastical and aristocratic forms remained distinct.”28

Acceptance of French styles in England, and an interpretation of Rococo style in comparison to Louis XIV is mentioned in the Phillips Guide to Chairs:

“After the masculine baroque of Louis XIV (1643-1715), France celebrated the rococo style under Louis XV (1715-1774), and its fantasies of feminine elegance attracted the rich and the fashionable in England”.29

As had been the case in the acceptance of Louis XIV style, the attractions of art superseded militaristic and political considerations:

“This style [Rococo] soon caught on in England where the influential wealthy patron class always included a significant section which looked to France for cultural leadership. This attitude was strong enough to survive both the period of chronic warfare between the two countries and the bitter criticism levelled at it from within by the anti-Gallican element in England.”30

In order to gauge the level of Louis XIV influence and as a study of the Rococo style I have chosen a specific subject for analysis from the Bowes Museum in County Durham. The Grimm, C. Johnson, P. 30 Joy, E.T. 28 29

Op. Cit. P. 40 Phillips Guide to Chairs P.40 An English Commode in the French Taste, cited in The Connoisseur No711, May 1971; P. 66

34

collection includes an identical pair of English console tables, dated about 1740.

The choice of this date should give a good indication of the level of influence of the Louis XIV style some 25 years after its height. English manufacturers and designers were able to avail themselves of styles and techniques from many sources, and the console table is a classic example of what was popular at the time. These tables were traditionally placed against walls and between windows, and often surmounted by tall mirrors or portraits. The tables in question are displayed in typical fashion at the Bowes Museum (Fig.1).

FIGURE 1

The frames are of carved and gilded pinewood with rectangular tops of verde antico marble(Fig. 2). FIGURE 2

Viewed from directly in front and at standing height (Fig. 3) there are immediately distinct signs of a retained Louis XIV influence. FIGURE 3

There is an impression of solidity, and of “order”, manifested in the substantial nature of the top and the supporting

edge, 35

and

in

the

rectangular form itself. This feature is further emphasised in the base. (Later Rococo abandoned this angular heirloom completely in favour of exclusively curved features including shaped tops, as shown below in another piece from the Bowes Museum, dated about 1750) (fig. 4). FIGURE 4

The

remainder

of

the

table,

however, tells a rather different story. The irregular shell motif in the centre of the base (Fig.5) is classic Rococo. FIGURE 5

Cabriole legs and scrolled feet (Fig.6) are also a typical Rococo feature. FIGURE 6

A later and more heavily Englishinfluenced design would have had claw-and-ball

feet,

so

French

influence is clearly still strong. The intertwined floral garland for purely decorative purposes (Figs.7 & 8) is another common Rococo element. FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8

The central shield design shows preliminary

signs 36

of

the

later

Rococo tendency to “invade” linear forms in that the upper crest and a small part of the adorning scrolls protrude upwards over the edge (Fig.9). FIGURE 9

There is, however, still a strong element of symmetry in the overall appearance

which

is

more

characteristic of Louis XIV than Rococo.

Although the structure of the tables is principally Rococo in style, the necessity to provide adequate support has meant that the legs, particularly at the top, exhibit a substantial and majestic Luis XIV appearance. They also feature a design on top of a plainer scroll (Fig.10). FIGURE 10

This tendency to adorn relatively solid architectural forms with more detailed decoration is widespread in Louis XIV furniture. Rococo tended more towards a more delicate touch in which the structure was ornate in itself.

This of course meant that anything designed to carry a certain amount of weight would require more than two legs if it were to remain delicate in appearance, so four or more legs was the trend in later years. This situation was of course helped by the fact that at the same time the table-tops themselves became generally smaller and lighter in keeping with the less monumental fashion. Consequently the conflict seen in this particular piece between the solidity of Louis XIV and the relative frailty of 37

Rococo was not so evident in more advanced designs.

In conclusion, these console tables give us a good insight into the level of acceptance of Louis XIV style in England by 1740 and a demonstration of how evolving styles do not always sit comfortably together. These incompatible features remain unresolved until a recognisable style is followed faithfully and in its entirety.

The move to neo-classicism was generally regarded as having have been inspired by the archaeological discoveries at Herculaneum and Pompeii where excavations began in 1738 and 1748 respectively. This coincided with an intellectual revival brought about by a feeling that previous styles had been frivolous and appealed purely to aesthetic tastes and personal whims. The period spans roughly the years 1760 to 1789. It may be noted that there is an overlap with Rococo during which time both styles were in common use.

The discoveries of these and other classical treasures together with proof of the ancients’ technological prowess produced a new level of respect for the ancient world and simultaneously provoked study of Greek art forms. Leaving aside any artistic considerations many years of war in Europe had brought about considerable financial hardship to France and other countries. A more simplistic style came as a considerable relief to some regimes who were happy to acknowledge that although the style usually appeared more modest than the preceding Baroque and Rococo it still represented the epitome of art of the day. Nevertheless, artefacts produced in true Neo-classical splendour were by no means inexpensive - only relatively so in comparison with what had gone before.

Whereas Baroque and Rococo styles developed from a myriad of sources and influences, the craftsmen working to Neo-classical designs always had clearer models to work from and perhaps a more defined sense of purpose based on respect and admiration for the ancients. Nevertheless, this was New Classicism and not an attempt to copy exactly. This is where we must look for evidence of the influence of previous styles, the role of gilding in general in this new fashion, 38

and in particular for any signs of Louis XIV influence.

But first, a brief look at what characterised this style. Though Neo-classicism was born in Italy, it was in France under Louis XVI that it blossomed and it reflected his desire for honesty, utility and simplicity. The influence of the gentle Queen Marie Antoinette should also be acknowledged.

Gone are the extravagant and overpowering flourishes, to be replaced by far subtler motifs of emblems, rosettes and garlands. Furniture shapes were simple and geometric with rectangular, circular and oval forms resting on straight, tapering legs that were either square or round in section. More emphasis was placed on “raw” materials and less on embellishments, so good quality woods were sought. Marble, of course, played an important role. Familiar classical motifs, such as perpendicular columns, laurel leaves, busts and statuettes abounded.

The Neo-classical style employed a wide variety of decorative material to mark out its subtle motifs. Ceramics, marquetry, ivory inlays, veneers and metalwork of all kinds were in use. Paintwork also became more popular. Gilding naturally played an important part in these decorative touches but it did not always sit so comfortably in this more simplistic, austere and sometimes relatively Spartan style.

Gilding continued to be fundamental in the production of picture frames, however. With regard to the actual design of picture frames once again the excellent Frameworks neatly summarises the Louis XVI or Neo-Classical taste

“ - rectangular and unadorned save for linear runs of classical ornament”31

At first glance it is easy to compare the compare the order and form of Neo-classicism with the architectonic style of Louis XIV and therefore to claim the existence of a common thread. There 31

Mitchell, P. and Roberts, L.

39

Op. Cit. P. 295

are a number of reasons why this is unlikely to be the case.

Firstly, the style itself is quite different. Although Neo-Classical architecture is similarly monumental, this trend is not carried through to smaller works where the delicacy, if not the level of ornamentation, of Rococo persists. Slender, tapering, usually straight and independent furniture legs, as opposed to the substantial ornate and often cross-supported legs of Louis XIV style show a marked contrast.

Secondly, as we have seen, there are few signs of Louis XIV style in France continuing into the Rococo period so that by the time of Neo-Classicism it would no longer have been considered fashionable except in very confined circles. That is to say that the two styles were neither concurrent nor in direct succession but separated quite distinctly by the intervening Rococo, even though this latter style continued for a period during Neo-Classicism.

Thirdly, references by the disciples of Neo-Classicism to a desire to return to older values go directly back to the classics - there seem to be no instances of the specifiers of style encouraging a return to the designs of any intervening period.

40

CONCLUSION

Louis XIV undoubtedly had a major influence on art in Europe and beyond. Unlike many trendsetters his influence was not just about the use of light or shade or some other artistic subtlety. It was all-encompassing. It elevated the perception of works of art from objects of beauty to the position of symbols of power and dominance in a way that had previously only been touched upon. Rulers who depended solely on militaristic achievement and political prowess appeared dramatically inferior and it was many years before the French people began to count the cost of their leader’s self-glorification. Even today, Louis XIV is remembered and appreciated more for his contributions to the world of taste and culture than for his questionable value to French and European harmony and well-being.

It is impossible to visualise Louis XIV without gilding. As this dissertation has discussed, it seems almost as though they were made for each other. We have seen that gilding has certainly existed since the beginning of man’s recorded history and, whenever circumstances have permitted, it has been a popular medium throughout the world. Other precious materials and artefacts will always play their part in demonstrations of opulence and in this Louis XIV was no exception. But it does seem likely that the Louis XIV era really did represent the ultimate in gilding - certainly within Europe.

The question of the level of influence of Louis XIV himself on contemporary and subsequent art is not so clear. Our research has revealed a complicated tapestry of interwoven styles and a myriad of competing political and religious forces.

Firstly, within France, the stage was already perfectly set for the arrival of Louis XIV. Previous monarchs, Louis XIII, various women of the court and the regent, Cardinal Mazarin, had created a climate of culture and opulence based on the finest of European, mainly Italian, art and had instilled this into the young king. Politically, the Duc de Richelieu, Louis XIII’s chief minister and the virtual ruler of France from 1730 had already prepared a scenario in which the 41

sovereign’s power was absolute. The Chateau de Versailles already existed, albeit as little more than a glorified hunting lodge.

Meanwhile, the Baroque style was reaching its climax but seemed to be searching for a defining element. It had covered a huge period of history and encompassed countless varying styles in different media and in a wide geographical area. ‘Baroque’ is one of the few artistic terms that the uninitiated comfortably use today without too much fear of contradiction.

Despite the fact that his name enjoys the privilege of being applied to an artistic style there seems to be remarkably little evidence that Louis XIV actually ‘shaped’ anything of significance. There is no doubt that magnificence and order were near to his heart. His passion for symmetry and uninterrupted long, straight lines led to the prohibition of draught-screens in Versailles - so much so that his second wife, Mme de Maintenon, who clearly preferred comfort to appearances, protested that she would:

“die from symmetry”32.

It is significant to note that this trend was one of the first to be dispensed with under the ensuing Rococo style.

Other than that, his influence could be seen more as that of a patron of the arts - supporting artistic movements, and artists and craftsmen themselves. Many of these, of course, were already in existence by the time he arrived. A more innovative ruler might have abandoned the complicated Baroque in favour of a more individualistic style, but, as we have seen, it fitted perfectly with his character and upbringing.

One of the main objectives of this dissertation was to investigate whether Louis XIV had a positive influence on European art and the craft of gilding. Perhaps one of Louis XIV’s major 32

Savage, G.

French Decorative Art P.30

42

contributions was that France and the rest of Europe were finally able to progress to a new and specific style, the Rococo. Baroque had been played to exhaustion. But there were obviously some more positive attributes as well.

We have seen how craftsmen who had been educated and nurtured under the Louis XIV and previous regimes were disseminated throughout Europe. Whether or not the style they had followed so religiously was particularly encouraged, the artists themselves were welcomed with open arms. Other countries were able to tap both their depth of artistic knowledge and their dexterity and experience in order to emulate the best and most appropriate of their designs - and to adapt them where preferred to the local taste.

Many well-known English names - Chippendale, Adam, Sheraton and others - were born out of this scenario, and although their influences were many and varied most owe a debt to the heritage of Louis XIV in some form or other. But we will never really know to what extent these brilliant artists would have flourished independently - our research has revealed that English designs were also influenced directly by other European sources.

Throughout all this, the durability of gilding from a technical standpoint is mirrored in its ability to transcend the whims of style. Whilst it lent itself splendidly to the dramatic and monumental excesses of Louis XIV it handled the transition to Rococo equally effortlessly. It seemed almost as though the continuance of the gilt finish was taken for granted. Louis XIV’s enthusiasm for, or at least approval of, this trend was no doubt a major contributory factor, and certainly the techniques perfected and experience gained under this regime proved invaluable in ensuing styles.

Louis XIV’s contribution to the world of art and beauty in psychological terms was also significant. After many centuries of dark depression and grim domination in much of Europe it was suddenly acceptable for a powerful and militaristic ruler to involve himself in matters of decoration. The same ugly deeds could still be carried out but the whole process was much more 43

pleasant in an atmosphere of sumptuous elegance. As we have seen, this stance was happily adopted by contemporary and subsequent rulers either for their own gratification or to delight their mistresses or entourage - or to impress their public and incite the jealousy of neighbours. Creativity was no longer left in the hands of impoverished artists or dominated by religious fervour.

The lasting impact of the style itself is not so clear. Indeed, it is debatable whether it was really a style at all - or simply an absolutist embodiment of the greatest elements of Baroque with certain emphasised characteristics. Whilst Louis XIV pieces are appreciated and admired today we only attempt to recreate them on a relatively minute scale - and because the whole essence of the style is monumental grandeur the results can be incongruous and disappointing. Louis XIV needs to be done well and in grand scale. Even if we could afford the unbridled extravagance we would struggle to find both the artisans and the moral justification to bring it to fruition.

Throughout this dissertation and in the study of the life and works of Louis XIV we have built up a picture of the character of this remarkable man. His ambitious and grandiose schemes eventually plunged France into ruin - yet in one particular field his immortality is assured.

In the world of gilding the ‘Sun King’ still reigns unchallenged.

44

BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Arnold, B.

ART ATLAS OF BRITAIN & IRELAND [Viking Penguin Books, Middlesex 1991]

Binstead, H.E.

FURNITURE [Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ltd., London, Undated]

Bly, J.

DISCOVERING ENGLISH FURNITURE [Shire Publications Ltd, Princes Risborough, 1976]

Brettell, R.R.

THE ART OF THE EDGE (The Art Institute of Chicago 1986)

Curson, P.

FRAMING AND GILDING [Skills Book Publishing, Sydney 1992]

Grimm, C.

THE BOOK OF PICTURE FRAMES [New York. 1981]

Heydenryk, H

ART AND HISTORY OF FRAMES [Lyons and Burford, New York 1963]

Johnson, P

PHILLIPS GUIDE TO CHAIRS [Merehurst Ltd., London 1989]

Joni. I.F.

THE AFFAIRS OF A PAINTER [Cooper Union Museum, New York 1936]

La Niece, S.

METAL PLATING AND PLATINATION [Oxford Press, Oxford 1993]

Learoyd, S

ENGLISH FURNITURE CONSTRUCTION AND DECORATION 1500-1910 [Evans Brothers Ltd., London 1981]

Librairie Larousse

PETIT LAROUSSE [Librairie Larousse, Paris 1965]

MacQuoid, P.

A HISTORY OF ENGLISH FURNITURE [Bracken Books, London 1988]

Mason, P. & Gregory, M.

OF GILDING [Arnold Wiggins & Sons Ltd. , London 1989]

Merrifield, M.P. [J.Murray,

ORIGINAL TREATISES ON GILDING AND OTHER ARTS London 1804]

Mitchell, P. & Roberts, L.

FRAMEWORKS [Merrell Holberton, London ,Undated]

Savage, G.

FRENCH DECORATIVE ART 1638-1793 [The Penguin Press, London, 1969]

Simon, J.

THE ART OF THE PICTURE FRAME [National Portrait Gallery Publications, London 1996]

45

BOOKS (Cont.) Stone, A.

ANTIQUE FURNITURE [Orbis Publishing Ltd., London 1982]

Taylor, G.

CONTINENTAL GOLD & SILVER [The Connoisseur, London 1967]

Whiley, G.M.

GOLDBEATING, 5000 YEARS OF CRAFTSMANSHIP [Victoria & Albert Collection, London, 1970]

Whiley, G.M.

LEAVES OF GOLD [Newman Neame, London 1951]

Wölfflin, H.

PRINCIPLES OF ART HISTORY (1915; translated 1932)

Yates, S

AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF TABLES [The Apple Press, London 1990] ARTICLES

Joy, E.T.

An English Commode in the French Taste, [cited in THE CONNOISSEUR No.711, May 1971]

Murdoch, T

Jean, Rene & Thomas Pelletier [cited in THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE No. 1136, November 1997]

Orbis Publications

Guide to Antiques and Restoration [TEC Ltd., Barcelona 1995]

Scott, B. 63]

Gilding the Lily [COUNTRY LIFE 1992 v.186, no29,16 July, p. 60-

Yorke, J.

Belvoir Castle, Leicestershire [COUNTRY LIFE 1994 v. 188, no 26, 30 June p. 62-65] MISCELLANEOUS

Van der Kemp, G & Meyer, D.

VERSAILLES [Editions d’Art Lys, Paris 1982] - (Guide Book)

Friends of the Bowes Museum FRENCH EIGHTEENTH (Guide Book)

DECORATIVE ARTS OF THE CENTURY [The Bowes Museum, 1986] -

Oddy, W.A.

GOLD IN ANTIQUITY: ASPECTS OF GILDING AND OF ASSAYING [The Chester Beatty Lecture, The British Museum 1982] - (Transcript, V&A collection)

Thornton, J

A GLOSSARY OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND DESIGN OF PICTURE FRAMES [Picture Frame 46

Workshop 1996] - (Mancat)

47